[MetalHellsAngel]

Just wanted to say this is a great post, and so true...

[rasmasyean]

I think he's talking about home desktop usage and general applications. Not specialty scenarios and vertical market niche applications and stuff like that.

[magice]

Frankly, when we review the whole thing, there are actually only 3 reasons why people quit GNU/Linux:


1. GNU/Linux is too diversed. This leads to point 1, 2, and 7 (partially 3 and 4): since when you say "GNU/Linux," you may mean one in about hundreds or so distributions. Even if you count by package management system, there are more than 4 (plus the subtle differences between, says, Fedora/Red Hat rpm and Mandriva rpm, or Ubuntu and Debian, etc.). Thus, it takes too much effort for a single closed-source vendor to support "GNU/Linux." The easy way is to open the source and let the distributions re-package it, but, well, then there would have been no problem. For point 3 and 4, well, trying to fix Ubuntu in Red Hat way will, um, break the system (potentially). Both of them are GNU/Linux, btw.

2. GNU/Linux is heavily community-based. This leads to 3, 4, and 5. It means there is no single entity to control the whole system and that there are many ways to achieve one thing, more than half of which are dirty hacks, more than 3/4 of which are not or very poorly documented. It also means that the people who work on the system are volunteers, and expect to be treated as such. Thus, getting support on GNU/Linux sometimes can be hard, and one may get flamed. After all, the users usually don't pay for the system, they enjoy volunteer work (but most of them seem to expect the people in the forum to serve them or something).

3. Users' biases and Software vendor's FUD. This is the main barrier and leads to everything. If you re-read whatever posted in this forum, or any GNU/Linux flaming for that matter, you will see a pattern. "I have just installed GNU/Linux, and it does not work like this-this-this." Or, "why isn't there a setup.exe" (can you please open that program manager program? It's right in your main menu). "NO, I WANT TO POINT AND CLICK" (again, can you try to use that program and be civilized?). "I cannot find help! No one to call, no one to blame" (do you know how to use forum and, for heaven's sake, Google? Do you know how to behave like a civilized person?). Then, Microsoft and most closed-source vendors fuel those biases with all bell-and-whistle. Easy-to-use (aka insecure way of installing your software, since you always install stuffs from unknown sources), nice interface (aka rip-off from either Apple or even X. Wait, what do you mean by "nice interface" without full 3D desktop, virtual workspaces, customized window manager, etc.?), professionalism (aka monopoly; worse, ability to spy on users' machines unlimitedly without even telling the customers -- this is in the EULA, if you care to read). If you compare Ballmer's words to, says, Hitler's, you will see a lot of parallel about (supposedly) work for customers' benefits (yes, and the "free people" buy that).

In the end of the days, some GNU/Linux hackers seem to give up on end users. "If they are stupid," some people say, "let them be. They will be unproductive, ripped off, and lead miserable life with their computers anyhow." Well, how far from truth is that?

[rgreen4]

It seems to me that in the decades that Linux has been available, if the "volunteer" programmers really wanted to make it easy to use with an installer, then they would have by now. After all, the MS operating system did not take off until they got rid of the old DOS command line and made it easy for anyone to use. I remember an article in a PC magazine back in the mid-80's that one day personal computers would be as common a popcorn. Everyone poo-poo'ed the idea because of the command line demands of DOS and how confusing it was for the average user.

The out came the Mac OS and Windows and life was good. When Linux first came out it was command line only, and everyone said how ugly and it would never capture the desktop market because it was hard to use. Then they proudly bring out their GUI interface and proudly show it off, but you still have the ugly and hard to use command line for program installations (they even confuse the effort by calling them "packages"). It's like walking into a show room with a nice sleek new sports car on the floor. You then go for a test drive only to find out it has a three speed crash-box transmission. Once you get it into high gear, it may be great, but getting it there can be a challenge. So you go down the street and buy one that is a little less slick, costs more, but is much much easier to drive thanks to the all syncro 4 speed transmission or even (gasp!) an automatic.

Even the professional race card drivers have given up the crash box transmission. It's way past time Linux to give up the command line and archaic program install routines. Recently they celebrated going from .99 market share to 1.01. Unless they change their ways, the next celebration will be going from 1.01 to 1.1, in about 10 years. In some ways, Linux is a good friend to Windows. After trying Linux and being thwarted, they flee back to Windows and won't even consider Mac OS/X.

[whs001]

Obviously these are the major objections to Linux, and your responses to them are mostly valid, but maybe a bit too glib. Regarding #3, for instance, Linux is more for hobbyists than Windows or MacOS, but there's room for distros that almost completely eliminate the need to resort to the command line. That's one reason why the huge popularity of Ubuntu - and the fact that it seems to be every columnist's recommendation for most users - is a problem for Linux. I have used all official versions of Ubuntu, plus Mint, CrunchBang, and others, and they're fine for what they are. Mint is pretty nearly good enough for a true newbie, but in general they don't enable the newbie to do simple things like play a CD or DVD without resorting to the command line nearly as well as PCLinuxOS or Mandriva. And in my case, with two different laptops, they don't do nearly as well auto-detecting the hardware. I simply cannot get any Ubuntu derivative to use the correct screen resolution for one of my laptops, even after resorting at length to the Ubuntu and CrunchBang forums -- but PCLinuxOS and Mandriva both configure it correctly without any user input at all. Which would you chose for a newbie -- command line input that sometimes doesn't work even for a moderately experienced user, or auto-configuration that rarely fails to work? OpenSUSE is the only other "top 20" distro I would recommend for out-of-the-box, newbie-proof usability, and its overhead makes it slow compared to PCLinuxOS. MEPIS is about on a par with Ubuntu et al. The rest are really not for total newbies.

[Kinman]

1 and 2 are about the market. Since linux's market is small, so the software and drivers out there are few.
3 is so outdated as many linux version already have a nice GUI, KDE or Gnome. Of course, if you do some advanced stuff like install drivers, it is another story.
“Linux just isn't as usable as Windows or OS X,”
While this may be true, many don't realize that OSX is actually another version, or distribution of linux.
Linux isn't natural built for user friendly, it is built for stability. That's why many mainframe servers use linux instead of window as server OS.
By the way, for those professional linux server, the OS won't even have a GUI, just CLI.

[Kinman]

1 and 2 are about the market. Since linux's market is small, so the software and drivers out there are few.
3 is so outdated as many linux version already have a nice GUI, KDE or Gnome. Of course, if you do some advanced stuff like install drivers, it is another story.
“Linux just isn't as usable as Windows or OS X,”
While this may be true, many don't realize that OSX is actually another version, or distribution of linux.
Linux isn't natural built for user friendly, it is built for stability. That's why many mainframe servers use linux instead of window as server OS.
By the way, for those professional linux server, the OS won't even have a GUI, just CLI.

[Evildave]

Minor technical nitpicks:

OS/X came from UNIX. Linux and Unix are based on the same POSIX (Portable Operating System Interface for Unix) standard, but are not the same.

GNU/Linux came from a different, completely open origin, based on the same overall technical design.

'Advanced stuff' like installing the right graphics drivers is super simple under Ubuntu, and even simpler under Mint where they don't bother with making you check something in the package manager to enable proprietary drivers and audio/video CO/DECs made by the manufacturers for Linux. Both ATI and NVidia fully support Linux. So try the latest Ubuntu and do a quick web search for enabling the extra drivers, or wait a week or two for Mint 7 and try that.

One certainty for people who 'Quit' Linux: Most of them have one bad experience dating back up to a decade, and believe it never improved at all since then.

Many also believe that one Linux distro is going to be exactly the same experience as another. So they had a 'bad time' with RedHat in 1999, or some super-compact Linux (with few drivers embedded in it) in 2004, and never looked back.

This isn't really a problem. Since GNU/Linux is gradually gaining momentum, and the distros are actually getting better every month, and persistent new users are replacing the fickle few who toyed with it one afternoon and dismissed it forever. The newer users are sticking with it.

When it works (which is MOST of the time), it works great. Sometimes there is a small issue which needs a quick web search to sort out. Then it works great from then on. At least when you search for Linux help, you FIND it. Granted, most people are a little too technically naiive to find a technical answer for themselves, and are frightened off by the first issue they encounter. Oh well. Maybe they'll try again someday, or maybe they won't and they'll keep bleeding money into their computer that they don't have to.

[WinTard]

Evildave, that was a great post!

~~~~~~~~~~
Everyone wants to be appreciated, so if you appreciate someone, don't keep it a secret.
~ Mary Kay Ash

[smax013]

Evildave said:

No wonder you're frustrated. You're doing it backwards.

Do the WEB SEARCH first.



After all, whatever the problem is, whatever the platform, it's probably already been asked and answered. Thoroughly. By polite people answering people who asked politely.


Call it 'selection bias'. I always FIND the best, most complete and
polite help by never bothering anyone with simple issues until I
discover a unique show-stopper on my own.

And this is why point 5 in the article is perfectly valid. This type of response to it just stinks of arrogance and superiority (which is probably true and deserved in many ways...in other words, I don't mean any offense by the comment...merely an observation), whether intended or not. But, you have to keep in mind that what to you are "simple issues" might be a completely confounding issue. And when it seems SO simple to you, it is easy to be condiscending to someone else who finds it not so simple...I know, I have battled that urge for years. Keep in mind that you might frequently be dealing with people who don't know what Safe Mode or the System Tray are in Windows. And believe or not, there are lots of people who could not Google search themselves out of a paper bag...it is not because they are bad people or necessarily even stupid...computers are just not their thing.

And so when you assume that someone who just does not get computers and REALLY needs some hand holding is either lazy or just stupid and you respond in a hostile manner, don't be suprised when they say "forget this" and run back to Windows were it is more likely they will be able to get someone willing to hold their hand.

As noted in some other posts, perception is reality. If the majority of users PERCEIVE Linux users to be hostile and arrogant, then that is what REALITY kind of becomes...and many of those users will avoid that experience.

Quote

You'll get REAMED by Windoze fanbois just as badly if you ask for help without even trying. More typically, you'll get charged real money by the minute for your 'help' and you'll receive it from Pakistan read (and re-read) very slowly off a checklist.

Very true. I have encounter many arrogant Windows and Mac users on forums that respond to simple requests with hostility or arrogance. It is not just a Linux thing. But, since Linux is an OS that has a higher percentage of "power users" that are more inclined to be more knowledgeable and thus potentially maybe a little condescending to less knowledgeable users, there is a MUCH greater chance of someone getting "reamed" by a Linux fanbois.

[rasmasyean]

Kinman said:

1 and 2 are about the market. Since linux's market is small, so the software and drivers out there are few.
3 is so outdated as many linux version already have a nice GUI, KDE or Gnome. Of course, if you do some advanced stuff like install drivers, it is another story.
“Linux just isn't as usable as Windows or OS X,”
While this may be true, many don't realize that OSX is actually another version, or distribution of linux.
Linux isn't natural built for user friendly, it is built for stability. That's why many mainframe servers use linux instead of window as server OS.
By the way, for those professional linux server, the OS won't even have a GUI, just CLI.

Do you even know what a mainframe is? Mainframes run things like z/OS and MVS on large scale computers. Linux is for x86 "desktop" type servers. You can stack them up in what they call a "blade" or a "rack" configuration, but it's not a mainframe. And they are used mostly to process data with lower OS overhead and hence simplicity. As for "stability", that's a myth. The largest section of the server market actually fluctuate between Unix / Windows, with Linux far behind.
www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS21703309
Linux is used a lot for "Web" servers, but that certainly is the minority of all servers in the world.
If you want to know how "stable" standalone Linux is compared to others (in the hands of people who know what they are doing), you look at applications where lives are at stake (not just serving letters, numbers, and photos). You look at computers that control processes in plants where something wrong can spill chemicals all over the work area and machines gone awry can rip you in half with 2 cents worth of electricity.
bq. "Makers can tailor-make industrial panel PCs to the performance requirements and budget considerations of buyers through the use of different processors and OS. Most entry-level models are designed with Via processors and Linux platforms. Midrange industrial panel PCs are mostly based on AMD processors. Models incorporating Intel processors and Windows OS are typically positioned as the high end. ... Some suppliers said that Windows 2000 and XP are the easiest to work with in terms of installing and developing applications, as these are stable despite their poor environmental adaptability. Meanwhile, Linux is not stable enough, but has better in environmental adaptability. Windows XP Embedded is hard to install, but it has better environmental adaptability.
bq. Interviewed makers claim that their industrial panel PCs can support Windows Vista." [http://www.globalsources.com/gsol/I/Industrial-panel-PC/a/9000000101154.htm]
Wow..."stable" huh? lol Better check your sources...

[Evildave]

But you don't even realize that you're badly over-reacting.

More 'techies' means more 'asperger' people with borderline personalities. They're not insuferable because they're 'arrogant'. They're insufferable to 'normal' people because that's just the way most of them are.

Most people who are asking technical questions fall into one of three broad categories:

A) Humbly wish to have their problem addressed, grateful they received help and for any tips they receive. Maybe even hope to learn from their past errors. Sometimes promise cookies/beer/etc.

B) Already let themselves get too ticked off dealing with their problem, and EVERYTHING anyone might say that isn't reassuring and soothing and candy-coated will seem 'beligerent' to them, because they're on a hair-trigger to going postal.

C) Feel entitled to help. The person on the other side of the computer/phone/etc. is their personal slave whose only purpose in life is to drop everything and hold their hand for hours to days sorting out every technical and personal issue they have.

You come across as a 'C'.

You take help, and complain that it's not packaged/worded to your liking.

Most technical nerds who do provide free help are doing so for various reasons; they're nice, bored, etc. Maybe it's the only human interaction that they get for months on end, and it needs to be filtered through an internet connection because they have no 'in person' social skills at all.

So have a little empathy for the guy/girl on the other end of the conversation. They're not always having the best of days, either, and the fact that they let people walk all over them doesn't mean that they have no feelings about the treatment dished out to them in 'thanks' for their help.

[rgreen4]

Boy are your wrong in your assertion. Smax is most often one of the hand holders who helps people with their problems. I have found him to be a very knowledgeable source of information in both the Mac arena as well as Windows (although he likes to spell it differently). One of the things that many of the "helpful" members do on this forum is call down those who come across as arrogant and talk down to members who are not computer whizes.
When he mentioned people who do not know how to boot into Safe Mode, he was most definitely not talking about himself, but many who he has helped. I have actually seen members ask what safe mode is and they are not putting on an act. It is just this arrogant attitude that gives the Linux crowd a very bad name in the industry. It is also one reason they Linux market share (after decades of being a free OS) is still not much more than a rounding error. And with the Holier Than Thou attitude of its proponents it's likely to stay that way.

[TechieXP]

Yes I agree and I was one of those. However after Vista was released, I was messing around on YouTube and I found videos of some really cool effects and features that could be done in Ubuntu that mimic and superceded what was in Vista. The huge deal of Aero Glass and how there are better options. I downloaded then what I believe was maybe version 7 or 8 of Ubuntu. After looking online an finding the programs that actually did what I saw, they took to much time to get installed. TAR packages are still a pain in Linux vs how they work in Windows or OSX. You still can't beat simply clicking and opening.

But to me if you want to glamorize an OS, and least make it easy to implement the features. It still has a way to go. And as someone else mention and I say all the time, Linux being free means no one is going to sit and progra day after day for no money. Which means without it, the chances of competing agsinst even OSX is a unsurmountable feat and MSFT is even further out the picture. I think OSX is much more of a driving force in getting MSFT to make Windows better. If people dropped Windows, that next plausible OS that could immediately take over would be OSX. Then teh other OEM"s not having an OS, will pick a distro of Linux to taylor to their own systems. But it would take time...which means Apple would basically take over teh market almost right away. However many companies could still get away with using older version of Windows almost indefinitely...as long as their needs don't make a major change. I still see businesses even today still using Windows NT 4.0 and WIndows Workstation 4.0 because it still meets or even exceeds their needs. Many are still even using Windows 2000 like we do where I work. We've only recently moved every system to XP SP3 and MSFT has already released 2 newer OS'.

We aren't denying Linux works...as the businesses who use Linux/Unix/FreeBSD are surely doing well with them. As long as you can grasp teh technical aspects of Linux you can almost make it do anything. But where it falls short is more than enough to shy people awy from it. Its been tried on netbooks...its been tried on free pc's going to other countries...its been tried at Wal-Mart.

Until the OEM's actually get behind it and push it out teh door preinstalled with everything working so that it is just like Windows....no one is going to stop using Windows just because they say something else is better. Its just like any other product. You have to prove more then just saying words.

[smax013]

Evildave said:

But you don't even realize that you're badly over-reacting.


More 'techies' means more 'asperger' people with borderline personalities. They're not insuferable because they're 'arrogant'. They're insufferable to 'normal' people because that's just the way most of them are.


Most people who are asking technical questions fall into one of three broad categories:


A) Humbly wish to have their problem addressed, grateful they received help and for any tips they receive. Maybe even hope to learn from their past errors. Sometimes promise cookies/beer/etc.


B) Already let themselves get too ticked off dealing with their problem, and EVERYTHING anyone might say that isn't reassuring and soothing and candy-coated will seem 'beligerent' to them, because they're on a hair-trigger to going postal.


C) Feel entitled to help. The person on the other side of the computer/phone/etc. is their personal slave whose only purpose in life is to drop everything and hold their hand for hours to days sorting out every technical and personal issue they have.


You come across as a 'C'.


You take help, and complain that it's not packaged/worded to your liking.


Most technical nerds who do provide free help are doing so for various reasons; they're nice, bored, etc. Maybe it's the only human interaction that they get for months on end, and it needs to be filtered through an internet connection because they have no 'in person' social skills at all.


So have a little empathy for the guy/girl on the other end of the conversation. They're not always having the best of days, either, and the fact that they let people walk all over them doesn't mean that they have no feelings about the treatment dished out to them in 'thanks' for their help.

On the VERY few occasions where I can't figure some computer issue out myself or find a solution myself by doing a Google search (which I can do quite while on my own...Google is my friend...at least until they use my private information for their own ends) and end up needing to ask, I would fall into your category A, not C. You made an assumption and assuming is not wise.

The majority of the time, I am on the other end of the computer help situation...I am what you referred to as technical nerd (or computer nerd or engineering nerd...call it what you like). And my comments were based upon how I personally try to treat people when I try to help them. And I like help others because I get enjoyment from it. On this forum, I spend WAY more time in the technical forums trying to help people than in the News Discussion forum having pointless discussions with people who have largely already made up their minds and have no intention of actually having a rational discussion, but would rather "preach" their gospel at each other.

Beyond than, my point has not changed. Even if we take your three types of people and even if we assume that overwhelming majority of people seeking help fall into either category B or C, then my point does not change. Even if the person is a complete simpleton who feels that they are entitled to help and expect you to drop everything to help them, if you respond by "REAMING" them out rather than trying to help them in a calm, nice way, then they are likely to no use Linux. And if you want more people to use Linux (for whatever reason...whether you think it is the best thing since sliced bread or because you have way to financially gain from it...etc), then you are going to have to help the Bs and Cs with out chasing them away.

And was the point of the item. Even if I was a "C", if you want me to use Linux, then it behooves you to treat me nicely and try to help me even if I annoy the crap out of you for treating you like my personal slave. The fact that such a personal might actually deserve to be talked down to or "reamed" is irrelevant...if you do treat them in such a manner, then they are more likely to quit Linux. And that was the point of the article...reasons why people quit Linux...did not say that they were good or rational reasons...just reasons.

[rasmasyean]

I always thought Aspergers Syndrome was caused by an inability to understand emotions. I mean, some people have a lot of empathy, while others are jerks, but the syndrome is supposed to be caused by the brain not behaving "balanced" beyond their own control. Of course there's always varying degrees to which this effect is present as well. When they say Bill Gates has some Aspergers (undiagnosed or whatever), and that causes his "genius", I think that might be just some speculation to try to understand what makes advanced tech people tick. But maybe it's just because he has a "vision" and just thinks that his "PC on every home" end, etc. is more important to concentrate on and people interaction is rather "trivial". Does that make him "arrogant"? Maybe arrogant to you if you're one of those trivial people, eh? ;)
In most cases I think it's just some psychiatrists trying to make money. It's an inexact science that no doubt involves some degree of manipulation of people, right? Some famous psychiatrist once committed him and his colleagues into a mental institution and once they got there, many were held for months despite claiming they were sane.
And having this "Asperger's Syndrome" doesn't mean you're definitely a "techie". Perhaps being more logic oriented does give you an edge with understanding machines, but it's just that some people concentrate their time to technology in the expense of human interaction and hence are not as suave as other people. After all, can you honestly say that you are completely yourself and honest to people you interact with? Do you speak you mind? If you're like normal people, you will be political, complement people, hold back on your true feelings, and play the "social game" because that's what society has told you are the right ways to treat others. That's also the way you make friends and get them to do things for you rather than make enemies who try to stab you in the back. All of this takes skill that is to a large extent learned from experience and/or cultural and behavioral training (where management, etc. uses to conduct foreign businesses). So if all you are concerned with it computers and playing games, you don't develop as much "human/cultural skill". It's not because you are abnormal.

[Evildave]

I dunno. You could certainly make arguments that aspberger's syndrome is a bunch of hooey.

Or you could probably continue scaling the difference between 'normal, well adjusted person' and 'autistic' any direction you like.

After all, given the relative nature of psychological evaluation, if everyone was borderline autistic, and you had lots of empathy and love, you'd be thoroughly abnormal, and they'd be trying to medicate you into being more 'mellow' and minding your own business.

And it's not like being an 'aspie' makes you a better technician, or being 'normal' makes you worse. It's just that there are more of them in technical fields, where human interaction is limited and they can get along OK.

Perhaps over the decades, I've been used as a human index a little too often.

[rasmasyean]

It's like plastic surgery where you don't like the way you look so you hire someone to change your body.
If you don't like the way you behave, you hire someone to change your brain.
Both cases to a strong degree depend on your environment and how it receives you and how you perform in it. You can be "ugly" or "dorky", but if you're successful then you don't need to hire a doctor. If you are not, then you blame yourself for being born a certain way and try to change it.

[rvbvolney]

Add one more: I have installed the last 3 ubuntu releases, and would love to use it. But each time, I try and get it to network nicely with windows shares, but with no luck. I was briefly successful once, but the next time I started the ubuntu desktop, it could no longer see the shares windows PC!.
I am very eager to use the ubuntu desktop, but networking with the other PCs in our house is absolutely necessary for the admin-me. I just want to copy and move files between PCs. Although I am not afraid of a command line (and have tried to use it to solve this problem), it should not be a required skill to enable simple networking functions. I love learning to use the new (to me) linux software and will keep trying to make it work. I really want it to, but can't keep wasting my time....

[BAMT]

Evildave said:

Another fine example is the amount people are asked to PAY for windows products that have 'scriptable' versions of their GUI. As if that's a 'premium' feature. 'Scriptable' is a synonym for something you could invoke from a script/batch.

People who believe this is a feature: did you ever use DOS? Batch files? Are you sure that you are "upgrading?"

Quote

Under Linux, everyone assumes you have BASH or one of its cousins.

Actually, it's probably almost impossible to find a Linux distribution without BASH (or an equivalent). Actually, is it even possible?